IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application for Orders in the nature of Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus in the in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

1. Shanthi Munaweera Vithanachchi, ‘Sri Mahal’, Haragama, Gurudeniya.

PETITIONER CA No. CA/Writ/050/2019 v.

1. R. Semasinghe, Commissioner General of Excise, 353, Old Kotte road, Rajagiriya

1a.) N. J. Gunasiri, Commissioner general of Excise, Excise Department, 353, Old Kotte road, Rajagiriya.

2). W. M. M. B. Wanasinghe, Deputy Commissioner of Excise (Revenue), 353, Old Kotte road, Rajagiriya.

2a.) Wasantha Dissanayake, Deputy Commissioner of Excise (Revenue)

353, Old Kotte road, Rajagiriya.

3. Upali Wickramarathne, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Central Province.

3a.) Upul Seneviratne, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Central Province.

4. M. W. M. M. Madahapola, Divisional Secretary – Pujapitiya, Divisional Secretariat - Pujapitiya, Pujapitiya, 4a.) Wathsala Marambage, Divisional Secretary – Pujapitiya, Divisional Secretariat - Pujapitiya, Pujapitiya, 5) Ven. Welgale Gnanasiri Thero, Pirivenadhipathi, Welgala Pirivena, Ankumbura.

RESPONDENTS BEFORE : M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J. &

Wickum A. Kaluarachchi J.

COUNSEL : Ronald Perera, P.C. with Dinesh Vidanapathirana for the Petitioner.

V. De Abrew, ASG, P.C. with R. Aluwihare, SC for the 1A, 2A, 3A and 4A Respondents.

ARGUED ON : 24.03.2023 DECIDED ON : 01.06.2023 M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J.

Introduction The Petitioner instituted these proceedings against the Respondents seeking inter-alia, a writ of certiorari quashing the decision/order of the 1^st Respondent contained in the document marked ‘P 16’ and a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to issue a liquor license to premises No.232, Bamunupola, Batugoda, as requested by the Petitioner.

The Respondent filed their statement of objections seeking to dismiss the Petition on the ground that the Petitioner’s application to transfer her license was rejected on the ground the same not being satisfied or complied with the rules and regulations. It was also stated that the Respondents acted within the scope and ambit of the law at all material times. Accordingly, the Respondent’s submitted that Petitioner is not entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction of this Court.

Factual background The Petitioner is in the business of carrying on a retail liquor shop named ‘Supreme Wine Stores’. She was first issued a license to carry on the business in 1999 and continued until 2017 at premises No.89, Pujapitiya, Ankumbura, [Paragraph 9 of the Petition.] The Petitioner produced copies of licenses issued to her marked as ‘P 2(A)’ to ‘’P 2(P)’. The Petitioner had also been granted a license for the year 2017 (‘P4’). However, on or about March 2017, the Petitioner had to close down her business place at No. 89, Pujapitiya, Ankumbura pursuant to an order of the District Court of Kandy made in the Partition action bearing No. P/5283 (‘P 5’). The Petitioner alleges that the title of the aforementioned premises

was vested with a relative of the 5^th Respondent priest and the 5^th Respondent with several others launched protests demanding the removal of Petitioner’s liquor store. Consequently, the 4^th Respondent Divisional Secretary called the Petitioner for an inquiry (‘P 6’). Thereafter, the 4^th Respondent, with the acquiescence of the Petitioner, directed the Petitioner to shift the business to another location (‘P 7’). The Petitioner found the place at No.46, Alawathugoda Road, Ankumbura and executed a lease agreement effective from 6^th September 2017 to 6^th September 2018 at a monthly rental of Rs.15,000.00 (‘P 8’). Thereafter, the Petitioner applied for the transfer of the liquor license to the new premises (P 9’). Her application was recommended by all the relevant officials (‘P 9(a)’). Subsequently, the 2^nd Respondent called for a report from the 4^th Respondent Divisional Secretary as to whether